Before a joint
statement that
doesn't
address the
targeting and
ouster of
Machar, the UN
issued
Power-heavy
footage, which
Inner City
Press took
Beyond the
Vine, here.

Now a new
study by The
Sentry details
looting by
South Sudan's
two main
leaders, and
Paul Malong
about whom
Inner City
Press has
reported and,
virtually
alone, asked
about at the
UN. The
report is here.

While
the report
makes no
criticism of
the UN, even
given UNMISS'
inaction amid
killings in
Malakal and
rapes in Juba
- but some
find in it a
“First World”
echo in the
getting-over
not only of UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's son
in law,
promoted
without
recusal by his
own father in
law to the top
UN post in
Kenya, but
also Ban's
nephew
“Dennis” Bahn.

Ban's nephew
Ban has
reportedly
used the name
of his uncle
and the UN to
make money;
Inner City
Press exposed
that he's
worked for the
company which
manages UNDP's
building on
45th Street in
Manhattan. Now
this
update.
We'll have
more on this.

Inner City
Press: after
this Security
Council trip
and the sort
of the joint
communiqué
that was
issued, what
is DPKO's
(Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations)
understanding
on what
countries can…
will be
allowed by the
Government of
South Sudan to
contribute
troops to this
4,000?
And also, the
commitment
that was made
to
humanitarian
access, some
people are
saying that
there've
already been
aid convoys
blocked around
Wau since the
visit.
And so that's
kind of an
OCHA
matter.
What is…
what's…

Spokesman:
The
humanitarian
access
continues to
be very
challenging
for us in
South
Sudan.
We're not
getting the
access that we
need. As
far as the
protection
force, I
think, you
know, that
process is
under
way. We
saw the joint
statement from
the Security
Council and
the
Government.
We also saw
some of the
clarifications
that were
given by the
Government
afterwards.
What we know
is that the
situation in
South Sudan is
critical.
We do need to
see progress
on the
political
front, and we
would like to
see all the
Security
Council
resolutions
implemented.

ICP
Question:
But who is
actually going
to speak to
potential TCCs
(troop-contributing
countries)?
Is it DPKO or
is it the
US? I
guess I…
Spokesman:
Well, I think
it is… you
know, it is…
It is, from
what I gather,
an IGAD
(Intergovernmental
Authority for
Development)-led
process.
They will be
placed under
the overall
command of the
peacekeeping
mission.
I'm sure we
will have a
role, but this
is not a
traditional
peacekeeping
force… a UN
peacekeeping
force, in a
sense.

ICP
Question:
And just one
last thing on
this? I
just wanted
to… before too
much time goes
by. At
the time that
Riek Machar
crossed into
DRC, some
people are
saying that
the
Government…
the Salva Kiir
Government
communicated
to the UN that
it would shoot
helicopters if
MONUSCO
helicopters
came in to
save them, and
I wanted to
ask you just
to clarify…
Spokesman:
I'm not aware
of those
threats.
The UN
operations
were done
within the
DRC.

At the end of
the Security
Council's
trip, AP
reported
that Kiir
demanded that
the 4,000 new
troops do not
come from any
neighboring
country,
making full
deployment
less likely,
and that
Machar “can't
return to the
country until
the next
election
cycle.” So the
US sold out
Machar. And Reuters,
handpicked to
travel, either
didn't get or
didn't report
this story --
ignored by a
now-affiliated
NGO. The lines
are all
blurring.

Reuters quoted
without
analysis
Minister
Martin Elia
Lomoro that
the government
“had no
objection to
who
contributes
soldiers.”

Now Martin
Elia Lomoro
says the
government
“must agree on
the number of
troops, the
countries they
come from and
the arms they
carry.”

Inner
City Press
asked the UN
to live-stream
the full
Security
Council's
press
conference on
September 4
but was told
by the UNMISS
mission they
can't do it,
which seems
strange. Inner
City Press'
questions to
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric about
civilians
being
subjected to
teargas in the
UN's camp have
been referred
to UNMISS.

Meanwhile Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman's
office didn't
inform Inner
City Press of
the trip, click
here for that.
What is the
US' role?
We'll have
more on that.
For now, this
audio.

Now Inner City
Press is
reliably
informed that
when the UN
Mission in the
DR Congo,
MONUSCO, first
considering
exfiltating
Riek Machar it
was told that
South Sudan
would shoot
down its
helicopter(s).
This is the
government
that UN
continues to
work with -
and in
instances,
cover up for.

In July 2016
the UN did
nothing while
those living
there were
rapes and, in
the case of
journalist
John Gatluak,
killed.

Now what?

On July 11, 13
and 14, Inner
City Press
asked the UN
about its lack
of response to
rapes and
killing in the
Terrain
Apartments in
Juba, South
Sudan, having
been contacted
by sources
there shocked
at the lack of
response by
the UNMISS
mission and
others. Video
here,
including the
UN on August
15 claiming
after a month
to STILL be
investigating
its
negligence.

On August 16,
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon issued
a statement
that he “has
decided to
launch an
independent
special
investigation
to determine
the
circumstances
surrounding
these
incidents and
to evaluate
the Mission’s
overall
response.”

On August 23,
Ban named
Patrick
Cammaert to
head it. Inner
City Press
asked, UN
transcript
here:

Inner City
Press:
About South
Sudan, when
you mentioned
that Mr.
Cammaert had
previously
done the
Malakal one, I
wanted to
know, has that
resulted in
any
accountability?
I went
back. He
did the study
of Gaza in
2015. He
was sent to
Sri Lanka in
2009.
I want to
know, overall,
is the goal of
this exercise,
particularly
given the
Terrain events
but also rapes
outside the
gate, to
actually hold
someone
accountable or
to write a
Malakal-style
study?

Spokesman:
You know, I
think the
Malakal report
was fairly…
was fairly
clear. I
think it’s
important that
we be able to
assess, not
only the facts
on the ground,
but the role
of the
mission, how
the mission
responded, how
the various
contingents
responded.
And from that,
obviously, if
there are
further steps
to be taken,
they will be
taken.

ICP
Question:
Right, but I
guess I’m
asking as an
example, in
the Malakal
case, have any
steps yet been
taken?

Spokesman:
Well, I think,
you know,
obviously, we
have seen how
various
contingents
responded, and
we hope that
also what
we’ve learned
from Malakal
will be able
to better
prepare us for
similar
situations
that may
happen in the
future.

ICP
Question:
Relatedly…

Spokesman:
Okay.
I’ll come back
to you.

What's “come
back” is
Cammaert. With
all due
respect, Ban
for his
“independent”
investigations
picks the same
people again
and again, or
people who
need or want a
UN post - it
creates an
incentive to
deliver a
report that
doesn't lead
to
accountability,
in order to
get the (next)
job: a
cover-up
cadre.

On the morning
of August 17
Inner City
Press reported
that the UN
Department of
Safety and
Security's
Chris Du Toit
is said by
staff to be
the one who
adjudged the
Terrain
Apartments to
be “safe,” and
had gone “on
leave,” like
Ban Ki-moon.

On the
morning of
August 22
Inner City
Press
exclusively published:
The UN
Department of
Safety and
Security's
MORSS -
Residential
Security
Survey Report
of October 29,
2015 says that
“the residence
is recommended
to UN
personnel,”
that “UN PK
[Peacekeepers]”
are “present
in the area...
guarding the
UN House,” and
that the gates
are in good
condition. At
noon on August
22, Inner City
Press asked
Ban Ki-moon's
lead spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, Beyond the Vine here,UN Transcript
here:

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
you about the
Terrain
Apartments in
South
Sudan.
Back on 14
July, you'd
said that the
UN was already
then starting
to look at its
role and I
have since
then obtained
what was the
UNDSS
certification
that it was
safe.
And it says
things like
the residents
is recommended
to UN
personnel but
it also says
that there
were CCTV
cameras
covering the
area 24/7,
that the gate
was fine, and
it recommended
some
mitigating
measures.
I guess my
question is,
if a month
ago... more
than a month
ago, you'd
said from here
that the UN
was
investigating
its role, what
happened in
that
month?
Is it true
that, as was
said in this
DSS
certification,
that there are
close… you
know,
closed-captioned
TV running the
whole
time?
And if so, why
didn't the…

Spokesman:
Again, I think
you have
access to
documents that
I don't have
access to.

ICP
Correspondent:
Well, you can
get this.

Spokesman:
Well, I'm not…
obviously, I'm
not on the
distribution
list of the
same documents
that you are
on. The…
there was a
preliminary
work that was
done, I think,
as Farhan
announced last
week. A
special
investigation
will be
conducted.
I expect to
be… to be able
to announce
more details
on that
investigation
either later
today or at
tomorrow's
briefing.
Obviously,
they will take
a look at all
the
circumstances,
what decisions
were taken by…
by the UN,
and,
obviously, the
fact that the
perpetrators
of these
attacks will
need to be
brought to
justice.

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
you about is
whether the
head of, my
understanding
is he is or
was the head
of the UNDSS
[Department of
Safety and
Security] in
South Sudan,
Chris Du Toit,
I'm told that
he had in
writing deemed
the Terrain
Apartments to
be "safe" for
UNFPA [United
Nations
Population
Fund], FAO
[Food and
Agriculture
Organization]
and other
staff to live
in and that
he's now just
recently gone
on
leave.
Was such a
determination
made?
And how does
the UN, in
places like
Juba,
determine and
certify
off-site
places for its
personnel to
live?
[Vine here.]

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, first of
all, I'm not
going to get
into the
specific facts
of the case,
which are
being
determined,
like I said,
first, by the
body that's
from the UN
Mission that's
already been
working on
this and now
by a special
investigation
that will be
formed in the
coming
days.
What I can say
more generally
is simply that
we do rely on
our Department
of Safety and
Security to
determine, in
any country,
where places
are that are
safe for UN
staff to stay.

ICP
Question:
Right.
So, it's fair
to say that
this was… this
place had been
determined to
be safe?
That's why
people were
living there…

Deputy
Spokesman:
No, that's not
fair to
say. I'm
not… like I
said, I'm not
going into any
specific
facts.
Those remain
to be
determined by
the groups who
are looking
into it.

ICP
Question:
And I also
want to ask
one
thing.
I've heard
that… that
staff of UNFPA
in particular,
but other UN
system staff
were
discouraged of
speaking with
the media in
the month
since this
event took
place.
And I wanted
to know, is
that… what is
the UN's… does
it feel that
it has a right
to tell its
staff not to
speak about
things that…
that… in which
they
themselves
were the
victims, or
are they free
at all times
to speak about
what happens
to them?

Deputy
Spokesman:
No, people are
free to speak
to the
media.
Obviously, as
staff are
aware, when
there's an
investigation
under way, we
don't want to
prejudice the
course of an
investigation. [Vine here.] But that… and
that is what's
happening.
But, as a
general rule,
yes, of
course,
they're free.

ICP
Question:
But, it seems
like this
investigation
is really
triggered by
the AP
report.
That's why I
say it's sort
of a
chicken-and-egg
problem.
You were doing
your own
report.
Then the AP
ran a story
where people
spoke to it
anonymously,
and now you're
doing a
special
investigation.
Is that…?

Deputy
Spokesman:
I don't think
that that's
fair. I
think part of
what was
happening is
that the facts
uncovered by
the UN Mission
prompted the
people here at
Headquarters
to believe
that something
more is
needed...

Inner City
Press: I've
gone back and
looked at
it. On
11 July, I
asked Stéphane
[Dujarric], as
it happened,
about the
Terrain.
And he said he
hadn't heard
anything about
it. And
then, two days
later, Ellen
Løj was on the
TV screen, and
I asked her
about
Terrain.
And she said
she
acknowledged
that she was
aware of it
and that
they'd sent…
they called
the army to
go. And
then, on 14
July, Stéphane
said more
about
it.
That's what
you're
referring
to. Was
there any
other
statement that
you guys
proactively
put out?
When?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Yes.
Exactly.
We got those…
those were the
details we
shared over
the days as we
got them.

Also,
who is going
to DO Ban's
belated
(second)
investigation?
Will the
investigation
involve DPKO's
“conduct &
discipline
unit” under
Mercedes
Gervilla, or
OIOS' Michael
Dudley - the
spouse of
Mercedes
Gervilla? It's
“all in the
family,” as is
so often the
case in Ban's
UN, where
Ban's mentor
Han Seung-soo
is given a UN
post while on
the board of
Standard
Chartered
Bank, with two
contracts with
the UN. We'll
have more on
this.

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
you again
about the
Terrain
Apartments.
I went back
and looked not
only at what
Ms. [Ellen]
Løj said, but
the day after
that, Stéphane
[Dujarric], on
14 July, when
asked about
what she said,
said that the
UN was already
at that time
investigating
its own
role.
So, I wanted
to know, in
the
intervening
month, what
has the UN
found
out?
Like,
yesterday, it
was said sort
of like the
UN, based on
the AP report,
is going to be
looking into
it. In
the month
since 14 July
and now, [16
August], what
did the UN
find out about
its role?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Like I said,
we are
investigating
this.
That
investigation
has not
concluded.
We may have
more to say on
this in the
next day or so
in terms of
what will be
done in terms
of any further
investigation,
but at this
stage, the
point is it's
ongoing.

ICP
Question:
But, when did
the
investigation
start, I
guess, having
now looked at
what was said
on 14
July?
Did it start
then or did it
not start
until now?

Deputy
Spokesman:
It started
very rapidly
upon the first
awareness of
this incident,
which, as
you're aware,
we reported to
you at the
time.

Not so much -
when Inner
City Press
asked, Ban's
lead spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric said
he knew
nothing; it
took a
question to
SRSG Loy to
get the first
admission, see
below.

On July 11,
Inner City
Press received
video about
the attack
while in the
UN Press
Briefing Room;
many including
on Capitol
Hill in DC
were asked
about it. But
only on August
15 did the US,
through its
Ambassador
Power, say
anything.

Now
after a
detailed
report by AP,
Inner City
Press on
August 15
asked Ban's
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq
about what Loj
has said. Beyond the Vine here.
Haq said
everything is
being
investigated,
including the
UN's role. But
what happend
with the
investigation
Dujarric
claimed a
month ago?

On the evening
of August 15,
US Ambassador
to the UN
Samantha Power
put out a statement, which rightly
if belatedly
noted that "We
are deeply
concerned that
United Nations
peacekeepers
were
apparently
either
incapable of
or unwilling
to respond to
calls for
help. We have
requested and
are awaiting
the outcome of
an
investigation
by the United
Nations and
demand swift
corrective
action in the
event that
these
allegations
are
substantiated."

But the
US was told of
this more than
a month ago.
And what
follow up has
there been on
the UN's
"investigations"
of inaction in
Malakal in
South Sudan,
and on the
rapes in the
Central
African
Republic? On
UN abuses in
Haiti and in
its own
headquarters?
We'll have
more on this.

On August 12
as the UN
Security
Council
prepared to
meet on South
Sudan, the
vote was
pushed back
from 10 am to
3 pm and the
draft weakened
to omit
triggers for
an arms
embargo and to
require
cooperation
with the Salva
Kiir
government.

One expected
someone - the
US? - to do a
reply. But
back down at
the stakeout,
the US and
France walked
together down
the hall;
others noted
the
contradictions
between some
members
speeches and
their votes.
It was done.

Inner City
Press this
morning
exclusively
published a
memo that the
International
Crisis Group
sent to lobby
the Council,
against
sanctions
-- in this
case against
Salva Kiir's
Chief of
General Staff
Paul Malong,
about whom we
have
repeatedly
reported.

The author,
Casie
Copeland, has
appeared more
publicly in
the page of
the UK
Independent, here.
In her ICG
memo some may
see an echo of
the NYT's
current series
on “think
tanks” in
Washington, or
may question
how opposing
sanctions on
Malong, given
his history
then and
since, is
consistent
with
researching
and lobbying
for peace. Ms.
Copeland's
explanation,
which we
requested, we
publish in
full below.

Separately
Inner City
Press hears
that neither
Kiir-favoring
Uganda nor
Sudan may
officially
send new
troops to
South Sudan,
leaving it for
Kenya and,
yes, Ethiopia.
From the ICG
memo:

I hope this
finds you well
and enjoying
the last days
of summer. I
am writing
with respect
to the
proposed
sanctions on
two South
Sudanese
generals.
As you know,
the ceasefire
workshop after
some delays is
now scheduled
from September
10-15. Both
the government
and opposition
have nominated
a set of
strong
military and
police leaders
to the
workshop and
individuals we
know to be
serious about
taking the
next steps to
establish
modalities for
the ceasefire
- such as
identification
of forces,
number of
forces in
Juba, withdraw
of allies,
re-supply
procedures,
and so on.
There is
reason to be
cautiously
optimistic for
the outcomes
of the
workshop.

It would not
be an
exaggeration
to say that
much of the
fate of this
very tenuous
agreement
rests on the
parties
abilities to
come to
agreement at
the workshop
and leave
committed to
implementing
the agreement.

Sanctions at
this point
would
dramatically
undermine
IGAD's ability
to secure
workable
arrangements
for the
ceasefire and
thus,
potentially
the overall
agreement.
However the
threat of
sanctions for
those who
undermine the
workshop or
violate the
agreement
afterthe
workshop could
be useful.

This is
particularly
true from the
perspective of
the
government.
The Chief of
General Staff,
despite his
reservations
about much of
the peace
agreement,
came to the
venue the day
of the signing
in Juba to
support his
President's
decision. His
support for
Kiir was
critical in
overcoming
many of his
Bahr el Ghazal
(and other)
constituency's
threats to
withdraw
support from
Kiir if he
signed the
agreement. To
sanction him
would appear
to be a "slap
in the face"
to a man whose
support for
the
President's
decision to
sign was
critical in
maintaining
cohesion in
Juba and whose
continued
support will
be absolutely
critical to
implementing
the peace
agreement.To
make a small
point about a
ceasefire
violation, the
Security
Council could
doom the
entire
agreement.

I look forward
to being in
touch with you
on this and
other matters
moving
forward.
Please do be
in touch if I
can provide
any further
information or
insight that
may be of use.

Kind regards,

Casie
Copeland, J.D.
South Sudan
Analyst
International
Crisis Group"

As noted Inner
City Press
requested an
explanation
and anything
else and
publishes it
in full:

"Dear Matthew,

Last year
within a few
weeks of the
signing of the
peace
agreement
(ARCSS) we
understood
there was a
proposal to
sanction the
Chief of
General Staff
of the
national army.
This followed
weeks of
intensive
pressure on
the government
to encourage
them to sign
the ARCSS. The
pressure was
successful and
the government
signed the
agreement
despite the
reluctance of
many senior
officials in
government. It
was our
belief, at
that time,
that to
sanction
General Malong
would have led
to the
government
disavowing the
peace
agreement and
could have led
to an
irrevocable
deterioration
in relations
between the
Governments of
South Sudan
and the United
States. It is
our belief
that neither
of those
outcomes would
have served
the interests
of peace in
South Sudan. I
am not aware
of any
proposal since
then to
sanction
General Malong
so would be
unable to
comment on any
such proposal.

As for the
email in
question, we
undertake
advocacy to
all council
members on a
regular basis.
This is done
through a
number of
means and
modes of
communication,
including
email. So
while this
email was
widely
circulated, it
was part of
wider advocacy
on this topic
which included
a public
statement -
"No Sanctions
without
Strategy" -
and reached
many other
council
members
directly,
including the
US government.
Warm regards,"

Casie
Copeland, J.D.
South Sudan
Analyst
International
Crisis Group

Back on
August 10
after UN
Emergency
Relief
Coordinator
Stephen
O'Brien
visited South
Sudan, Inner
City Press
asked him
about UN
delays in
registering
Internally
Displaced
People (IDPs)
arriving at
the UN's
Protection of
Civilians
sites and
about reported
UN inaction as
mostly Nuer
women were
raped just
outside the
PoC site in
Juba.

O'Brien
acknowledged
some delay in
registration,
diplomatically
chiding the
government for
suggestion
that people
return to
where they had
fled from in
order to
register. He
described a
quickly built
camp in Wau,
though the
reports of
registration
delay have
mostly been
from Juba.

Pressed on the
issue of UN
inaction on
rapes, O'Brien
said he had
not gathered
any new
information
about the
allegations
during his
visit, adding
that Salva
Kiir told him
rapes are
“unacceptable.”

Interestingly,
O'Brien said
that now food
is only
allowed be to
flown in from
Uganda, not
Sudan or
Kenya. We'll
have more on
this.

Separately,
Inner City
Press asked
O'Brien about
the
“Functional
Review” he had
commissioned,
and the Heads
of Office
critique of
it, which
Inner City
Press published
here.

O'Brien in his
response
offered praise
and emphasized
how short a
time he's been
at OCHA. We'll
continue to
report on
whether
O'Brien, and
certain other
Ban Ki-moon
Under
Secretaries
General, can
or will remain
under the Next
SG. Some,
"even" P-5,
should go.
Watch this
site.

In the UN's
continued
withholding of
news and
answers about
South Sudan,
the reports of
the UN's own
knowledge of
abuses are now
being withheld
from its own
impacted
national
staff.

"On 04 August
in Yambio,
UNMISS
received a
copy of a
directive from
the National
Security
Service (NSS)
instructing
the senior
SPLA Liaison
Officer to
inform UNMISS
that all staff
arriving in
Gbudwe State
from Juba or
elsewhere must
register at
the NSS office
in Yambio
before
proceeding to
the UNMISS
compound. The
Internal
Security
Bureau (ISB)
Director
stated that
the
registration
of UNMISS
staff is for
their own
security."

Inner City
Press asked UN
Spokesman
Farhan Haq
about the
incident with
no real
answer. Later
on August 5,
the UN
belatedly
emailed its
Malakal
report, or the
executive
summary, which
Inner City
Press immediately
put online
here. On
August 8,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's spokeman
Farhan Haq, UN transcript
here:

Inner City
Press: The
Malakal report
that was
released on
Friday. It
seems like one
of the
recommendations
is that, going
forward, any…
any failure to
respond by
TCCs
[troop-contributing
countries] or
police-contributing
countries
[PCCs] be… it
said reported
to UN
Headquarters
and to the TCC
or PCC
involved.
In the spirit
of kind of
name-and-shame,
which is taken
to the sexual
abuse issue,
is there a
problem with
naming the
contingents
who either
didn't respond
or said they
could only
respond if
their capital
told them they
could
respond?
Is the idea to
make that
public or to
simply keep it
in-house?

Deputy
Spokesman:
At this stage,
we're
following up
with the
relevant
countries and
trying to make
sure that any
appropriate
follow-up is
happening.
We've also set
in motion
adjustments to
the force
structure to
identify some
of the issues
in the
investigation,
but in terms
of actions by
the
contributing
countries,
we're working
with them to
make sure that
they do follow
up.

ICP
Question:
Right.
And so is that
the sum total,
all you have
on DPKO's
(Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations)
response to
this lengthy
and pretty
troubling
report?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, there is
more. As
it is, two
commanders
were
repatriated
following the
Malakal
incident.
And, as you
have seen from
the report, we
gave a
detailed
summary of the
events in
Malakal of the
response by
the mission
and their
recommendations
in
there.
And so that
describes the
state of play.

UN complains
of
“unrealistic
expectations
for the
protection
[UN] could
feasibly
afford”
Paragraph 19.
So UN, What Is
It Good For?

Feb18-19 was
“not the fist
instance when
military units
in Malakal
demonstrated
unwillingness
to implement
ROE,” Rules of
Engagement,
Paragraph 21;

The UN “acted
without
urgency to
repair the
breach in the
PoC fence
which had been
reported on 17
February” -
that is called
negligence.

Then the UN
report cites
“failing to
cease [sic] an
opportunity
to
better manage
the developing
security
situation” -
that is called
misspelling.
Paragraph
22

The UN BoI's
Malakal report
says the names
of
UNresponsive
units should
be given to
UNHQ and to
their missions
- but NOT to
the press or
public. This
is Ban
Ki-moon's ad
Herve Ladsous'
UN.

And here is
the UN's
“Confidential”
instructions
to UN staff,
how to deal
with
authorities in
South Sudan -
when the Press
tries exactly
the same
inside UN
Headquarters
with UN
Security, it
gets ousted (audio
here) and
evicted.

"CONFIDENTIAL

Ref:
104/SB/06/08/2016

UN Security
will like to
remind staff
members on
actions that
should be
taken on
approach to/at
military check
points.

v Reduce
speed, slow
down and stop
completely at
the
checkpoint.

v Dim
headlights/put
interior light
on, if at
night.

v Roll
window down
not more than
1”, be
friendly/courteous.

v Show
ID if asked -
do not
surrender,
stay in
vehicle unless
ordered out.

v Insist
on your rights
as a United
Nations staff
member. Never
forget that
you have
rights.

Note: At no
point should a
staff member
speed pass or
ignore an
official
check point,
as such action
could be
misinterpreted
to be hostile
and could
result in the
vehicle being
shot at.

CONFIDENTIAL"

Just two
points for
now: when
Inner City
Press points
out that the
UN mis-spoke
to the Special
Rapporteurs on
Freedom of
Expression and
Human Rights
Defenders,
claiming there
was an
“altercation”
in the UN
Press Briefing
Room which is
disproved by
video, the UN
does not
correct
itself. And UN
Security's
McNulty tore
Inner City
Press' UN ID
off its neck,
threw bag with
laptop in
it on
the sidewalk.
We'll have
more on this.

"On 03 August
at 15:00 hours
in Juba, one
UNMISS
Military
Personnel
(MLO) was
prevented by
airport
security
personnel from
boarding Kenya
Airways flight
at Juba
International
Airport for
allegedly
taking
pictures at
the
passengers’
waiting room.
Before being
released HG
security
personnel
seized his
laptop,
national
passport and a
smartphone and
asked him to
report to
their office
on 04 August.
The case was
reported to UN
Security."

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
you two things
about South
Sudan. One is
this report
that… that, in
the camps, in
light of the
recent
violence, the
people that
have gone into
them weren't,
in fact,
registered as…
as… basically,
in order to
have food
delivered to
them, to
register… to
get bigger WFP
and that this
is in fact
leaving some
of them
without food,
and so, they
have to go out
of the camp,
and it puts
them at
risk.
The second
question I
have it from
an UNMISS
[United
Nations
Mission in
South Sudan]
memo I've
obtained and
published,
which said
that on 3
August an
UNMISS
military
personnel was
stopped at the
airport by the
Government.
Computer
laptop and
phone all
taken.
UNDSS [United
Nations
Department of
Safety and
Security] is
aware of
it. And
I wanted to
know, what is
the protocol
for a Member
State to take
electronics
concluding…
presumably
including
secret
information
from UNMISS
military
personnel?
And what is
the UN doing
in this case
both to
protest it and
to make sure
the
information is
not misused?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, I will
check what
UNMISS is
doing by way
of reaction,
but,
certainly,
our… all of
their
personnel are
supposed to
have freedom
of
movement.
And they and
their
belongings,
including, of
course, their
communications,
are to be
protected.

ICP
Question:
This one… I
just want to
ask you,
because what
it says is
that this was
taken because
they were
taking
photographs
inside the
airport.
So I wanted to
know, does
your
interpretation
of freedom of
movement and
freedom of
action include
taking
photographs
inside an air…
the airport,
which is the
Government's
rationale?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, we would
have to see
whether the
actions taken
by staff are
appropriate.
But,
certainly, the
Government
knows what its
obligations
are under the
Status of
Forces
Agreement, but
also, of
course, UN
personnel are…
wherever they
go are
supposed to
have freedom
of movement if
they go in
accordance
with their
work
responsibilities.

ICP
Question:
And
registration?
Did you have
an answer on
that, on
whether IDPs
[internally
displaced
persons] that
have gone into
the camps last
week have
registered…?

Deputy
Spokesman:
As far… if I
hear
otherwise, I
can let you
know, but as
far as I'm
aware, all… at
all Protection
of Civilians
sites, the
registration
continues.

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well,
registration
is a standard
practice of
the
sites. I
don't know
whether
there's a
problem at any
particular
site, but it's
standard for
all of the
inhabitants to
be registered.

On August 3 we
published
these UN
internal
reports from
South Sudan,
marked "“UN
STRICTLY
CONFIDENTIAL:
ST/SGB/2007/6,
Information
Sensitivity,
Classification
and Handling"
--

"Armed
Conflict –
Attack: On 03
August at
about 05:00
hours in Leer,
reportedly,
SPLA soldiers
from Koch
launched
attacks at the
villages
located north
of the UNTCC
TOB destroying
and looting
villages. At
08:10 hours,
about 105 IDPs
from Kuleer
Payam arrived
at the Leer
TOB seeking
protection
from GHANBATT.

"On 02 August
at about 23:47
hours in Juba,
a UN ambulance
escorted by UN
military
departed UN
House Level I
Clinic to
UNMISS-Tomping
Level II
Clinic, with a
female IDP
patient in
labour. Along
the way, the
team was
harassed by HG
security
forces at
numerous check
points. At one
check point,
the HG
security
personnel
threatened to
take the
patient out
because of her
ethnicity."

Inner City
Press: on
South Sudan, I
wanted to
know, I've
seen a memo
from DSS
[Department of
Safety and
Security] in
South Sudan,
saying they're
aware of these
attacks on
Leer by the
SPLA [Sudan
People’s
Liberation
Army].
It seems from
the memo that
the UN
acknowledges
that it's the
Salva Kiir
forces
attacking this
Riek Machar
area.
So, I wanted
to know, when
is the UN…
what's the
process for
the UN
reporting on
this type of
fighting that
it sees?
The memo also
talks about a
woman IDP
[internally
displaced
person] being
harassed on
the way to
giving birth
based on her
ethnicity.
So, I’m just
wondering,
what is the
protocol for
UNMISS [United
Nations
Mission in
South Sudan]
or other UN
forces in
South Sudan to
actually say
what's taking
place?

Spokesman:
Well, I think,
you know, it's
always… it
would be
helpful for
your friends
at DSS to
share whatever
they share
with you with
me before the
briefing so I
can give you a
better
update.
But, what is
clear is that
we have
regularly
reported from
here on
fighting, on
incidents,
when they
occur.
And the
Secretary-General
reports
regularly to
the Security
Council,
whether in
its… in the
periodic
reports on the
mission or
periodic
briefings,
verbal
briefings by
DPKO
[Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations].

ICP
Question:
But, just as
an example,
for example,
it's reported
that many UN
staff have now
been unable to
get back into
the country
under this
travel
restriction.
So, when… it
seems like
this is a
violation of
the SOFA
[Status of
Forces
Agreement].
Is the UN
complaining
publicly
about…?

Spokesman:
I think we
have raised
this
publicly.
We're
obviously
raising it
privately.
It is critical
that the
Government of
South Sudan
allow the UN
staff to go in
and do its
work and
implement the
resolutions of
the Security
Council and
the mandate
given to us by
the Security
Council.

Riek
Machar was
attacked and
chased out of
Juba; now he
and his forces
say they will
return absent
the deployment
of an enhanced
international
force which
those in
control of
Juba say would
immediately be
attacked.

Sources tell
Inner City
Press Paul
Malong is
setting up his
artillery by
the main
bridge into
Juba on the
main road
artery linking
Juba with
Nimule, some
9,500 meters
opposite UN
“Protection of
Civilians” and
in direct line
of sight. This
is described
by the sources
as an act of
brinkmanship
and an attempt
to secure the
road corridor.

And Inner City
Press can
report that
the UN
Security
Council
anticipated
visit to South
Sudan and
perhaps Sudan
from August 15
to 19 is being
discouraged by
the US, which
says it is not
ready. We'll
have more on
this.

The US on July
30 issued a
statement
saying the UN
had documented
rapes - but
NOT saying
that UN
Peacekeepers
watched and
did nothing.

On August 2,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric what
the
ramifications
are for UN
peacekeepers
who watch
rapes and
offer no
protection:
"on what you
said about the
witness
accounts
saying that UN
peacekeepers
stood by as
women were
raped outside
of the camp of
UN
House.
What would be
the
ramifications
if there’s an
investigation
if, in fact,
it’s found
that
peacekeepers
saw, watched,
and did
nothing?
What happens?

Spokesman
Dujarric:
"Individual
accountability
of soldiers
is, as it is
in every case,
up to the
troop-contributing
country to
decide on what
disciplinary
action is
taken."

Ban's UN has
no basis to
make claims
about "zero
tolerance."
In the UN
Security
Council on
July 29 US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
said the US
had reports of
an upsurge of
violence in
the
Equatorias: "I
want to stress
this also for
Council
members here
today – we
have just
received very
disturbing
reports of
significant
violence in
the Equatorias
in South
Sudan. And all
of us need to
be on alert, I
think, this
weekend,
because events
could spiral
rapidly out of
control, yet
again." What
might she have
meant?

Inner City
Press can
report that
the US'
Ambassador in
South Sudan
Mary McPhee
and US envoy
Donald Booth
have received
this - and it
has been
reiterated to
them by the
office of a
U.S. Senator,
not
necessarily
one that might
be imagined:

The plan for
SPLA/ IO is to
launch
simultaneous
assaults in
three
locations at
once, probably
in a few days
from
now: 1:
attack from
Yuai on Pajut;
2:in Malakal
and 3rd: on
Juba from the
direction
of the
Nimule road
and also from
Terekeka.

Johnson
Olony is the
leader of the
planned attack
in Malakal.
Gatwech
himself is
said to be
organizing the
attacks around
or on Juba
liaising with
Wani Konga
forces kitted
out with taken
SAF cache in
2005; he is
said to be
based not far
from Juba,
possibly
around Lafon.

I have no
information on
the reality or
number of the
militia forces
said to be
mobilizing to
attack in
Malakal or
Juba; these
forces are
being talked
about by the
tribal
factions
mobilized in
Yuai.

From IO “It
will all start
North...but
details
changes are
imminent in
the last
minute....
those Su[san]
Rice are weak”

I don’t know
if the
international
community will
sit this one
out as well
but there will
be many dead
people
possible
myself since I
am here in the
UN House.... I
can put on a
backpack and
keep moving on
my own but I
do care about
this country
enough to
stick it out.
Don’t let this
next offensive
be what I have
been worried
about turning
into the
genocide I
have been
warning about.
Everything I
had said would
happen and
come true did
come true and
I was ignored.
Please for the
love of
humanity don’t
let this next
offensive take
place, there
are women and
children here,
people who are
friends and
these are
human beings,
these are
personal
relationships
that were
developed out
of kindness
and trust and
here we sit
once again,
here I am once
again warning
of what is
about to come.

If black
lives matter
in the United
States why
don’t they
matter here?
The people in
the POC are
trapped with a
false sense of
security, what
we saw last
time is a
preview, the
killing has
been
rehearsed.”

Previous
warnings
leading up to
this one got
only interim
responses from
one Stetson
Sanders,
Director of
International
Narcotics and
Law
Enforcement at
the UN Embassy
in Juba. We
report this
part in light
of the US
Embassy's
chiding of
South Sudanese
media for
reports, while
the US Mission
to the UN has
been less than
responsive,
including on UN
free press
issues.
Albert Taban
is out on
bail, but UN
radio reporter
Goerge Livio
remain
imprisoned and
UNremarked
upon.

In the UN's
continued
withholding of
news and
answers about
South Sudan,
the reports of
the UN's own
knowledge of
abuses are now
being withheld
from its own
impacted
national
staff.

Since
the UN refuses
to answer
questions, and
its Department
of Safety and
Security (DSS)
Bans
the Press from
South Sudan
meetings,
video
here, we
published
below a
document of
complaint
against the
UN's reported
plan to
relocate
Internally
Displaced
Persons to the
UN House where
its
peacekeepers
stood by
watching as
IDPs were
raped. Photo
of complaint
here. and
below.

On July 28,
following an
order from the
government
replete with
mis-spellings,
tweeted
photo here,
the UN in
South Sudan
accepted
violations of
its Status of
Forces
Agreement -
and says that
if UN staff
doesn't accept
and comply,
they will be
charged money.
This is Ban's
UN: Ban's
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq
said he was
unaware of any
of this, hours
after the
UNMISS
Broadcast
email Inner
City Press
published.
(Haq also
tried to deny
UN corruption
right insiee
UN
Headquarters,
here.) From
the UN
transcript:

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
you on South
Sudan.
I've seen a
letter from
the Government
to UNMISS,
saying that
going forward,
all entries to
the country
require 72
hours' notice
and also some
further
restrictions
on
leaving.
I've also seen
a memo, a
broadcast of
UNMISS telling
people that
they have
complied with
this and if
they don't
they can
basically be
charged money
if they seek
to travel
outside of the
restrictions
imposed by the
Government.
I wanted to
know whether
these
restrictions
comply with
the Status of
Forces
Agreement, and
if they don't,
why UNMISS is
not only
acquiescing to
them but
charging staff
for not
complying with
them?

Deputy
Spokesman:
I would need
to check
whether this
is something
that is
happening.
I'm not aware
of this as a
matter of
policy.

ICP
Question:
A broadcast on
this staff
today about
this.

Deputy
Spokesman:
I will have to
check about
what the
details are of
that.

New
Immigration
Procedures for
UNMISS
Personnel
Arriving at
Juba by UNMISS
and Commercial
Flights

The purpose of
this broadcast
is to inform
all personnel
that UNMISS is
now required
to submit the
names of all
passengers
arriving in
South Sudan to
the Ministry
of Foreign
Affairs (MOFA)
three working
days before
the planned
arrival
date.
Only
passengers
that have been
notified to
the Ministry
will be
permitted to
proceed
through
immigration
and enter the
country.
Personnel not
notified to
MOFA are
likely to face
deportation.
The new
notification
procedures
apply to all
UNMISS
personnel
arriving by
both UN and
commercial
flights.

Consequently,
all UNMISS
personnel are
required to
note the
following
restrictions
and plan their
travel
accordingly:

UNMISS Flights
Arriving from
Entebbe and
Nairobi.
UNMISS
passenger
manifests will
be closed
three working
days before
planned
arrival in
Juba.
The manifest
will then be
dispatched to
MOFA for
processing.
Only those
passengers
listed on the
manifest will
be permitted
to check-in at
Entebbe or
Nairobi.
Manifested
passengers
that fail to
check-in for
their flight
will be
required to
re-submit
their MOP
request and
will be
delayed for a
minimum of
four days at
their own cost
and against
their leave
entitlement.
These
procedures
apply to all
categories of
personnel
travelling on
UNMISS
flights.

Commercial
Flights
Arriving at
Juba
International
Airport.
As an interim
measure all
UNMISS
personnel,
except
National
Staff,
returning to
South Sudan by
commercial
flights are to
provide UN POL
Immigration
Officers with
the following
information in
Excel format
at least 4
workings days
before
returning to
the country,
and ideally
before they
depart South
Sudan...

Failure to
provide the
required
information at
least 4
working days
before planned
arrival back
in South Sudan
could result
in the
passenger
being delayed
at their own
cost and
against their
leave
entitlement."

On July 27
Inner City
Press asked
Ban Ki-moon's
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq
about the
rapes, the
inaction, and
the planned
relocation. Vines here and here,
UN
transcript
here:

Inner City
Press:
witnesses in
the UN House
camp as saying
that
peacekeepers
watched and
did nothing as
these rapes
occurred on 17
July, and I'm
wondering, you
know, what is
being done
about that?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, first of
all, yes, we
take very
seriously the
allegations
that
peacekeepers
may not have
rendered aid
to civilians
in
distress.
Of course,
that is
exactly what
they are
supposed to
do, and there
would be
serious
repercussions
if they failed
in that
duty.
But, in this
case, the
force command
of the mission
of UNMISS is
looking into
the
allegations,
in line with
its
established
protocols.

ICP
Question:
And we will
get the
results,
whether they
confirm or
deny them?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Yes,
certainly.
We will update
you once there
is a result to
that.

ICP
Question:
And I wanted
to ask you
something else
about South
Sudan.
There is an
NGO
[non-governmental
organization]
memo that I've
seen and
published,
which is
basically
protesting the
shifting, the
movement by
the UN of IDPs
[internally
displaced
persons] from
Tomping to UN
House and they
say it's not
prepared
there, they
say because of
this, it could
create greater
Cholera
risk.
And they are
also,
obviously, in
the case if
it's true that
people can be
raped right
outside the
gate of the
camp with
peacekeepers
watching, why
would you be
moving them
there?
So, I'm
wondering, I
know this memo
has been
delivered to
UNMISS, but is
UNMISS going
to forcibly
relocate IDPs
from Tomping
to UN house
and if so why?

Deputy
Spokesman:
It's not a
question of
forcibly
relocating
them.
What we are
trying to do
is make sure
that, wherever
the displaced
people are
kept, it's a
place with the
safest
standards, so
we are trying
to move them
to a place of
greater
safety.
The problem
throughout the
country has
been one of
safety and the
responsibility
for that
ultimately
lies with the
warring
parties who
have rendered
huge areas,
including
around Juba,
in and around
Juba, as
unsafe.
But what we
would need to
do is have a
place where we
can have the
best provision
of
facilities.
The Tomping
site has, as
you know, been
full for quite
some time, and
what we are
trying to do
is move from
one area to
the other
gradually and
as a way of
ensuring
better safety
for the
displaced
people.

ICP
Question:
What the NGOs
are saying is
that Nuer in
particular are
at risk in UN
House; that,
in fact,
people are
saying that,
in fact, the
rapes that you
are describing
were largely
targeting Nuer
woman and that
putting Nuer
men into UN
House
basically
makes them a
target for the
majority
group, so are
you aware of
that?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, you
heard what
I've just said
about the
problems
regarding the
rapes.
We are
documenting
all of the
rapes, as much
as we
can. And
we also
following up
at the level
of the UNMISS
force command
with any of
the problems
involving
peacekeepers.
But,
ultimatel,y we
have to make
evaluations
based on where
displaced
people are
located and
where they
will be
safest, and as
we make those
evaluations,
part of what
we will be
doing is
moving them
from one to
another.

There is
cholera, lack
of protection
and lack of
planning. This
is Ban's UN.

On July 25,
Inner City
Press asked
the UN if it
recognizes the
replacement of
Riek Machar,
and why it
covers up
Kiir's
detention of
UN staff. From the UN
transcript:

Inner City
Press: I also
wanted to ask
about a staff
member.
I've seen a
memo from DSS
(Department of
Safety and
Security) and
UNMISS (United
Nations
Mission in the
Republic of
South Sudan)
and I'm
wondering why
we have not
heard more
about
it. In
Yambio, an
UNMISS female
national staff
member was
arrested and
detained by
the National
Security
Service,
reason
unclear,
thought to be
political,
still
detained.
So this is as
of Friday, and
I haven't
heard anything
since from the
UN. Is
this staff
member still
detained by
National
Security in
South Sudan?

Deputy
Spokesman:
I will check
with UNMISS
where we stand
with
that.
Many times,
what we're
trying to do
is just deal
with the local
authorities to
make sure that
any
misunderstandings
are cleared
up; but,
certainly,
whenever that
happens, we
want to make
sure our staff
will be
released.

ICP
Question:
Just one more
on this in the
same memo.

Deputy
Spokesman:
Hold on.

This deputy
spokesman, who
defends and
stonewalls on
Ban's and
Gallach's
Banning of
Inner City
Press from
South Sudan
and Haiti
meetings,
waited a full
24 hours to,
instead of
emailing his
answer as he
dos to scribes
who do not
criticize or
question Ban,
this canned
answer: "I was
also asked
yesterday
about the
detention of a
staff member
in Yambio last
week.
According to
the latest
information
from the UN
Mission in
South Sudan,
she has not
yet been
released.
UNMISS is
continuing to
press for
access and
visitation,
but has thus
far been
denied.
We are aware
that her
family has
been able to
visit
her.
UNMISS is
continuing its
engagement
with the
authorities in
this regard."

UN
whistleblowers
have leaked to
Inner City
Press a UN
memo that

"WESTERN BAHR
EL GHAZAL: On
20 July at
about 14:00
hours in Wau,
two SPLA
personnel
stopped a UN
vehicle
carrying two
UNMISS
national staff
members (of
CAD Section)
when they were
conducting
official duty
(commodity
survey) at Jou
marked area.
The SPLA
questioned the
UN staff
members about
their
activities and
forcefully
took the shoes
of one of the
staff members
as well as the
amount 15000
SSP before
releasing them
unharmed."

"On 21 July,
at
approximately
16:25 hours,
in Yambio an
UNMISS female
national staff
member was
arrested and
detained by
National
Security
Services
(NSS). The
reason for the
Staff's
detention is
unclear but
may be
political. UN
Security was
denied access
to the staff
member... She
is still
detained by
NSS."

Why has
the UN said
(and seemingly
done) nothing
about this? On
the evening of
July 22, not
on his
schedule which
listed only UK
Foreign
Secretary
Boris Johnson,
Ban Ki-moon
appeared at a
book
event for
the spouse of
the US
Ambassador to
the UN.

It was
pre-planned:
Ban's personal
podium was set
up in advance.
But it was not
on his
schedule, and
Ban's name was
omitted from
the squawk
announcement
by this
spokesperson's
office. And
despite a
written claim
it was open to
all
journalists,
in front of
the event
along with
bodyguards was
a sign,
here,
"Closed
Meeting."
We'll have
more on this.

The
nationalities
of UN Police
who left their
posts amid the
recent
fighting is
being withheld
by Ban
Ki-moon's UN,
see below.

The day after
UN Spokesman
Farhan Haq
said police
which left
would not be
allowed to
return, on
July 22 Inner
City Press
asked him
about German
saying it
would return
despite
leaving,
UN Transcript
here:

Inner
City Press:
you said
yesterday that
you were
unable to
determine
whether there
was any memo
about the
police that
left their
posts or were
pulled out of
the country in
Juba, so I
wanted to know
can you now
confirm that
there is such
a memo from
Mr. [Hervé]
Ladsous to Ban
Ki-moon about
it, that it
doesn't have
the Security
Council
material?
But I also
wanted to ask
you, Germany
has said they
are going to
return.
This is a
direct quote
from Deutsche
Welle,
Germany's
Foreign
Ministry
spokesman said
that German
police
officers would
return to
South Sudan
when the time
has
come. So
it seems like
you have said
from this
podium that
some people
won't be
returning.
Are the
Germans
returning, as
they say?

Deputy
Spokesman:
I believe
there are
already still
some Germans
in the police
contingent in
the UN Mission
in South
Sudan, so
there are some
there.
But, beyond
that, I don't
have anything
specific to
say about any
national
contingents,
but I believe
that they are
there already.

ICP
Question:
They
acknowledged
they took
people out and
say that they
will be
returning, so
that is why
I'm asking
you, will
these same
officers who
left return?

Deputy
Spokesman:
The officers
who left would
not return,
under the
understandings
we have
reached;
unless there
is other
clarification
about how
there was
notification,
the policy
that we have
is what I've
stated a few
days ago.

We'll see. UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon has
played fast
and loose with
the media. On
July 21 it was
announced Ban
would have
“press
remarks” at
3:30 pm. Inner
City Press
asked Ban's
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq if
the topic
would be only
Inter-Parliamentary
Union, or
something
else. Haq said
IPU, that's
what it's
about.

But
once upstairs
at 3:30 pm,
Ban Ki-moon
launched into
a statement
about South
Sudan, while
taking no
question on
it. Video
here. He
spoke about
the media in
South Sudan,
when his
UNMISS has
Banned the
media from
entering and
covering the
Protection of
Civilian sites
at UN House
and Tomping
for ten days.
(Inner City
Press for the
Free
UN Coalition
for Accessasked
about it on
July 20.)

Ban did not
mention the UN
Police who
left their
posts during
the violence,
nor why his UN
is treating
them with
kidgloves, and
not naming
them, due to
their
nationality.
Inner City
Press asked if
it could ask a
question and
was told no.
So it's
propaganda.
Knowing how
Ban's UN
retaliates -
evicting Inner
City Press
from its
longtime
office for
merely trying
to cover an
event in the
UN Press
Briefing Room
that was
nowhere
described in
writing as
Closed, Inner
City Press did
not shout out
its question.
But this is
Ban's UN:
censorship.

And lack of
transparency.
From the July
21 UN
transcript:
Inner City
Press: can you
confirm
that the UK
withdrew two,
Germany seven
and Sweden
three, and
then can you
state whether
the US has
withdrawn its
police
component?

Deputy
Spokesman:
No. I
can't confirm
any
nationalities.
Basically, the
concerned
Member States
were informed
of our
decision.
It's up to
them to make
public details
on their
decision to
evacuate their
officers, and
that is of
their
choosing.

ICP
Question:
And what about
a UN that
opines on the
qualifications
of a country
to be a
permanent
member of the
Security
Council?
I'm wondering
does the
Secretariat
have the same
view of
France, given
sexual abuse
in CAR
(Central
African
Republic), and
we can go down
the line of
the P5...

Deputy
Spokesman:
First of all,
I'm not aware
that there is
any sort of
authentic
memo. I
was actually
trying to
check up with
my colleagues
this morning
about this
document that
was reported
on one of the
news
wires.
And, no, they
looked over
all their
memos and
there is no
such document
that they see,
so I'm not
aware of any
such thing.

ICP
Question:
Finally, even
if a country
gives notice
in the middle
of a crisis
and pulls its
soldiers out,
doesn't that
also hurt
morale?
In terms of
civilian staff
remaining,
what is the
difference in
terms of
hurting
morale?
And do you
encourage
countries, can
Chad pull out
of Mali any
time they want
or when it
gets
dangerous?
How does that
work?

Deputy
Spokesman:
First of all,
this is not
simply an
issue or
pulling
out. We
are well aware
that there are
times when
military
circumstances
on the ground
are extremely
dangerous.
We are well
aware that
troop-contributing
countries and
police
contributing
countries have
sovereign
control over
their
personnel and
may take
operational
decisions to
ensure their
safety, which
may, from time
to time,
include
relocating
them or
withdrawing
them; that's
very
clear.
For us, the
issue is
really one of
communication
and
coordination;
that in this
case where
some
withdrawals
were done
without
consulting the
mission, that
impedes our
work and
that's what we
wanted to make
sure does not
happen.

ICP
Question:
How is it
consistent
with
protection of
civilians if
the UN is
saying to its
peacekeeping
and
police-contributors
you can leave,
whenever it
gets dangerous
you can leave,
no problem?

Deputy
Spokesman:
That's not
what we are
saying.
We are not
saying you can
leave.

ICP
Question:
As long as you
tell us we are
leaving?

Deputy
Spokesman:
No, it's not
even
that.
People have to
take military
decisions.
We are not
trying to put
people into a
path where
they have to
sacrifice
themselves.
There are ways
to protect
people in
conditions of
conflict that
do not involve
that kind of
action.
But what we
are saying is
that those
actions that
they take need
to be
coordinated.
And, of
course, when
we do these
things, we
have to make
sure that we
can ensure the
protection of
civilians.
We have to do
that.

ICP
Question:
Isn't there a
chain of
command?
Doesn't the
command to
come out,
well,
whatever,
doesn't it
come from the
top or can
individual
countries say,
I'm going my
own way, this
is what I'm
asking you?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Of course we
have a chain
of
command.
We have force
commanders for
peacekeeping
missions.
There is a way
in which all
of these
issues are to
be
handled.
Again, with
the
appropriate
amount of
communication
and
coordination,
there is a lot
of things that
can be
done.
Without that,
the system
doesn't work
and that is
why we need to
make sure that
all
contingents
understand
that.

Likewise
the UN was
slow to call
for the
release of
Alfred Taban,
and has been
quiet about
its own UN
radio reporter
George Livio.
On July 21,
the UN Special
Rapporteur for
Freedom of
Expression
David Kaye
spoke out for
the former:

"It is crucial
for a country
seeking to
establish
peace and
stability that
it takes
active steps
to encourage
freedom of
expression for
everyone. Any
pressure
against
journalists
based on the
content of
their
reporting
represents
regressive
steps that
South Sudan
cannot afford
to take. The
arrest and
detention of
Mr. Taban are
unlawful as
they are
directly
linked to the
legitimate
exercise of
his right to
freedom of
expression."

Mr Kaye’s
statement has
also been
endorsed by
the UN Special
Rapporteur on
the situation
of human
rights
defenders,
Michel Forst;
and the UN
Working Group
on Arbitrary
Detention."

Below
is another
internal UN
system
document
leaked to
Inner City
Press,
including on
harassment of
UN staff by
the Salva Kiir
government,
backlash
against Ban
Ki-moon's
proposals
covered up by
the UN in its
public
statements
(Inner City
Press asked
the UN about
it, below).
And also below
was the US'
warning for
July 20, the
demonstration
which
featured,
among other
things, the
old post of
the UN's last
SRSG packing
heat.

On July 20,
Inner City
Press asked
the UN about
journalists'
open letter to
Ban Ki-moon to
end his
mission's
banning of
media from the
UN camps. Video here.

Inner City
Press: an open
letter to Ban
Ki-moon, in
South Sudan a
number, almost
all media
organizations
have written
an open letter
to Ban Ki-moon
urging that
after a week
of being ban
from entering
that they be
allowed to
access and
report on the
protection of
civilian sites
and UN House
in Tomping say
that there is
no basis for
keeping them
out, that they
are unable to
report, so
they have
asked him
directly in
this open
letter that
I'm staring at
to change the
policy and
allow them
access.
What is the
overall policy
of the UN and
why hasn't it
been
implemented,
if it is what
I think it is,
in this case?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, I'll
check. I
mean, as you
know, we've
had security
concerns about
the various
sites,
including
Tomping, given
the events of
last time, so
there has been
a need to make
sure that the
populations
that we're
caring for in
those areas
will be
protected.
Beyond that I
will check if
there is
anything.

Inner City
Press:
Sure.
Even in other
circumstances
the UN sees
the benefit of
having a
reporting of
even the
dangerous
situations.
They know that
it's
dangerous.
They want a
report on it.

Deputy
Spokesman:
Certainly.
And we try to
open up sites
as quickly as
we can, but we
try to do that
with respect
for the
security
concerns; and,
as you know,
the last week
and a half has
been a fairly
exceptional
circumstance
in that
regard.

"U.S. Embassy
Juba, South
Sudan,
Security
Message for
U.S. Citizens:
Demonstration
in Juba on
July 20

The government
of South Sudan
has announced
that it is
sponsoring
ademonstration
against the
IGAD-proposed
and
AU-endorsed
increase of
UNMISS troops
to Juba.
The protest is
scheduled to
take place in
Juba on
Wednesday
morning, July
20, beginning
at SPLM House
and moving to
the John
Garang
Memorial.
U.S. Citizens
are advised to
avoid the
areas in which
the
demonstration
will take
place. Even
demonstrations
intended to be
peaceful can
turn
confrontational
and escalate
into
violence."

Here's recent
UN document,
and what Inner
City Press
asked UN about
it:

"The fighting
might reignite
despite a
ceasefire.
Troops are
moving in
Malakal,
Nassir, Bor
and Unity.

A
recommendation
has been made
to relocate
all UN Staff
currently in
Juba to the UN
House Compound
of the UNMISS
Compound,
Tomping -
action was
taken by FAO
already.

There have
been
demonstrations
by the Dinka
against the
arrival of
additional
International
troops today,
18 July 2016.

UNMISS
incoming
passengers
have been
facing
difficulties
with local
authorities at
the airport in
Juba. The
president of
South Sudan
has instructed
the local
authorities
not to allow
foreign
soldiers into
South Sudan.
UNMISS
soldiers are
considered
foreign. The
Special
Representative
of the
Secretary-General
(SRSG) for
South Sudan is
trying to work
out a solution
with the
Ministry of
Foreign
Affairs and
the Ministry
of Interior.

3300 IDPs are
currently in
the UNMISS
compound –
Tomping, Juba,
however they
will be
transferred to
the Protection
of Civilians
(POC) area.

The Ugandan
military
convoy is
escorting
Ugandans that
were trapped
in the
capital, Juba
during the
heavy fighting
out of South
Sudan.

The IGAD
summit in
Rwanda and New
York propose
to fortify the
UN Mission in
South Sudan
and the
strengthening
of Civilian
Protection.
This may
however
increase the
animosity
against the
United
Nations.

Thirty percent
of the shops
in Juba are
open, however
most shops
managed by
foreigners
closed. There
is a shortage
of food, water
and fuel in
Juba and the
border to
Uganda is
closed.

Looting of
NGO’s inside
and outside of
Juba is
ongoing - this
may continue
for a period
of time.

All program
criticality
level 1 and 2
staff
currently
outside Juba
must be
cleared for
travel by the
Designated
Official
before
proceeding to
Juba. It
remains the
responsibility
of Agency
Security Focal
Points and
Security
Officers, and
UNMISS heads
of sections to
seek security
clearance for
this travel
from the Chief
Security
Officer.There
is an outbreak
of cholera in
Juba town,
Tomping and
Duk."

Inner City
Press: I've
seen a UN memo
which links
these
hindrances
with orders by
Salva Kiir to
oppose any
foreign troops
coming
in. Says
that… that
UNMISS is
viewed as
foreign
troops, and
that the
level… that
there's an
anticipation
that the level
of animosity
will increase,
given the
Secretary-General's
call for
troops and an
arms
embargo.
So I wanted
to, I guess,
get you to
say… do you…
this is what
the memo says,
but are you
willing to say
that there's…
there's a
connection,
that this is a
pattern of
harassment
based on the
Secretary-General's
proposals, and
how do you…
how do you
propose to
protect staff
from this
harassment or
respond to it?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, I
wouldn't link
it to the
Secretary-General's
proposals.
Our basic
point is that
there has been
increased
harassment of
personnel.
There have
been increased
levels of
obstructions.
There have
been increased
denials.
Those are all
clear, and
those cannot
and must not
be allowed to
stand.
We have to be
able to go
about our work
with… without
any sort of
hindrance like
that.
Regarding why
there's a…
different
types of
harassment
from the
population, I
wouldn't
conjecture
what the
reasoning
is. I do
believe that
if there's any
coordinated
effort to
obstruct our
work, that has
to be halted
immediately.

Inner City
Press:
Right.
This memo also
says that the
Special
Representative,
I guess Ms.
[Ellen
Margrethe]
Løj, is trying
to work out a
solution with
the Ministry
of Foreign
Affairs and
the Ministry
of
Interior.
Is that… is it
fair to say
that she's
trying to… is…
is it… is it
simply to… to
ensure free
movement of UN
staff, or is
it to actually
get permission
to bring in
the troops
that have been
voted on by
the African
Union?

Deputy
Spokesman:
Well, in terms
of the
permission and
consent for
troops, that
is ultimately…
this is
something also
that is being
considered by
the Security
Council, and
we'll leave
some of this
in their
hands.
As you know,
the Council is
considering
the matter,
and we're not
getting in
advance of
that. But
regarding Ms.
Løj's
discussions,
of course she
is in regular
touch with the
authorities in
South Sudan to
make sure that
we can go
about our work
without any
hindrance.

Inner City
Press:
And I just
wanted to ask
one… and
thanks for the
statement on
Alfred
Taban.
There's this
other
journalist in
South Sudan,
George Livio,
who's been now
in prison for
a year.
And he's an
employee of
the UN's radio
station
there.
And I wanted
to know, and
some people
there want to
know, has
UNMISS made a
similar
call?
What progress
has been made
in terms of
getting Mr.
George Livio
freed?

Deputy
Spokesman:
We continue to
work on all of
these
issues.
Throughout the
situation in
South Sudan,
we've been
trying to make
sure that
freedom of
expression and
freedom of the
media is
upheld, and
our Human
Rights Office
does monitor
and
investigate
all of these
cases.

After Ban
Ki-moon's
unsuccessful,
some say
self-serving
whistlestop
African tour,
Uganda's
Yoweri
Museveni has
said no way to
any arms
embargo. Wires
like Reuters,
quick to
regurgitate in
other
instances the
economics of
arms sales,
didn't do so
here. But here is a document
Inner City
Press has
obtained, of
South Sudan's
Paul Malong
asking
Museveni's
UPDF for end
user
certificates
on weapons.

We'll have
more on this.

Below is UN's
internal
communication,
signed off on
by the head of
the UN
Department of
Safety and
Security Peter
Drennan.
(UNMISS' Ellen
Loj said on
July 13 to
Inner City
Press, You get
everything as
related to
DSS, Vine
here.)

Now from
within UN DSS,
leaked
exclusively to
Inner City
Press, comes
this: "On 15
July in Juba
on two
occasions
during the day
on the Yei
Road, INGO
vehicles
moving to UN
House PoC 1
and PoC 3 were
stopped by
SPLA.
The occupants
were
reportedly
questioned
aggressively
on a number of
matters before
being allowed
to proceed."

And this: "On
14 July at
about 16:00
hours in
Malakal a
private truck
contracted to
IOM was
stopped by a
group of IDPs
within the
PoC. The
driveSen
McCain and Rep
Bass, those
trapped were
saved. No
thanks to the
UN, we'll have
more on this.

UN leak to
Inner City
Press:

"Exchange of
heavy gunfire
outside the UN
house, at
about 300
meter north of
the main gate
started in the
early hours of
10 July 2016.
Few rounds of
mortar shells
landed close
to POC 1 and
inside the UN
house. IDPs in
large numbers
subsequently
began to seek
refuge inside
the UN house.
Heavy fighting
continued
throughout the
day including
movement of
towed
artillery,
tanks and
troops. Heavy
fire was
observed on
the hill
north-east of
the main
gate.
Fighting
intensified in
the afternoon
near POC-3.
Heavy and
concentrated
mortar rounds
in the
immediate
vicinity of
the UN house
resulted in
the SPLA IO
troops
concentrating
around POC-1
western gate.

The UN Tomping
compound area
also witnessed
build-up of
heavily armed
SPLA soldiers
who took up
positions and
fired bursts
of small arms
weapon.
Multiple
instances of
bursts of
rapid small
arms fire
followed by
heavy weapons
and mortar
were heard
around the
Tomping area
all thought
the day. A
large number
IDPs and
civilians
sought refuge
inside UN
compound in
Tomping. The
western gate
of Tomping was
affected by
heavy fire.

Heavy fighting
resumed this
morning 11
July 2016, at
about 08:50
hours in most
parts of the
city. UN house
and Tomping
compound
witnessed
intensified
heavy
bombardment
with the use
of mortar,
tanks,
artillery and
fires from
helicopter
gunships.
Other areas
that witnessed
armed activity
where within
close
proximity of
WFP, UNICEF,
IOM and UNDP
residential
compounds.

1.
In view of the
prevailing
security
situation in
Juba, the
Designated
Official for
South Sudan,
in
consultation
with the
Crisis
Management
Team, has
recommended
the temporary
suspension of
all incoming
and outgoing
official
travel of
UNSMS
personnel to
and from Juba
until further
notice, with
exceptions to
be decided by
the Designated
Official.

2.
I endorse the
above
recommendation
and request
UNSMS
organizations
to comply.
Should any
mission be
deemed of
critical
importance,
advance
coordination
with the
Designated
Official
should take
place for
consideration
and approval.
The security
situation is
continuously
monitored, and
once
permissible,
the suspension
will be
reviewed."

Previously
leaked to
Inner City
Press on early
on July 10:
two fatalities
in UN
"Protection of
Civilians"
camp 3, seven
Chinese
peacekeeper
injured, three
to four
critically.
And the role
of Paul
Malong, see
below.

After more
than three
hours of
meeting, on
July 10 the UN
Security
Council
members
emerged. US
Samantha Power
spoke briefly,
about getting
more troops
from regional
countries.

Inner City
Press then
asked the
Council's
president for
July, Koro
Bessho of
Japan, if an
arms embargo
had been
discussed - no
- and which
countries are
being looked
to. He said he
would not name
names. Video
here.

Belatedly
reaching the
US Security
Council
stakeout on
July 10, Inner
City Press
asked French
Ambassador
Francois
Delattre about
the injured
peacekeepers -
nothing --
then asked US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
about the role
of Paul
Malong, should
he be
sanctioned?
Again,
nothing. After
6 pm, Inner
City Press
asked Angola's
Ambassador
about the use
of attack
helicopters;
he said heavy
weapons
shouldn't be
used.

The head of UN
Peacekeeping
Herve Ladsous,
who should
know or quit,
said he
couldn't give
any casualty
figures. Inner
City Press
asked about
the seven
Chinese
peackeepers
seriously
injured it
reported hours
earlier;
Ladsous said
two more,
beyond the
Chinese. Inner
City Press
asked if his
DPKO has dealt
with Paul
Malong. No
answer. Video
here.

Some say the
US has been
too quiet,
even as
aircraft are
prepared in
Djibouti for
an evacuation.
From US
sources,
citing a "hero
from
Benghazi,"
comes word of
US personnel
"trapped" in
Juba, amid
ambushes and
NSA Susan Rice
set to meet
with South
Sudanese
diaspora / in
exile,
including
Pagan Amum as
well as
Bakosoro, see
below.

US officials
Donald Booth
and Susan Page
have been
informed of
SPLA-IO
reinforcements
on their way
and the role
of Paul
Malong, with
Ugandan
backing.
Meanwhile
officials of
the UN, which
has helped in
the cover up,
blithely
tweet "shame
on their
leaders"
-- are they
aware of
Malong?

Now as some of
those fleeing
are forced to
climb over the
UN's closed
gates, with
helicopters
with links to
Uganda's UPDF
over Juba,
here was the initial
memo Inner
City Press
exclusively
published:

“JUBA Nearly
150 soldiers
are reported
dead from
Friday's clash
between South
Sudan's rival
forces loyal
to President
Salva Kiir and
those loyal
to the
First Vice
President Riek
Machar.

The heavy
fighting
occurred on
Friday near
J1, the
Presidential
Palace,
between troops
of the South
Sudanese army
(SPLA) and
protection
unit of the
First Vice
President,
Machar, of the
SPLA in
Opposition.

35 of the
SPLA-IO
soldiers lying
dead and over
80 died from
the SPLA’s
side.

All the
bodyguards of
the First Vice
President who
were deployed
on the street
outside J1
were killed,
said a senior
SPLA officer.

A huge force
came from
nowhere and
joined up with
President
Kiir’s tiger
force and
opened fire on
Machar’s
bodyguards
deployed
outside the
Palace for
protection."

On
July 8 amid
the surge in
violence in
South Sudan,
the UN
Ambassador of
Lithuania,
until recently
on the UN
Security
Council,
tweeted on
Friday that
the Council
would meet
that afternoon
about the
crisis.

But when
ICP asked the
month's
President of
the Council,
Koro Bessho of
Japan, he said
there would be
no Security
Council
meeting that
afternoon. The
Lithuania
ambassador
deleted the
tweet; the
UNTV crew took
down their
camera. This
as, for
example, World
Vision went on
lock-down in
Juba. Ban
Ki-moon, in
China, issued
a canned
statement -
this as his spokesman
refuses Press
questions
about South
Sudan, calling
them "too
granular."

The UN
Department of
Safety and
Security
situation
report covers
up what other
sources say
was the
targeted
assassination
of an SPLA-IO
soldier:

3.
Crime –
Shooting:
On 05 July at
about 10:30
hours in Juba,
UN military
personnel on
patrol
reported a
shooting
incident near
the NISS HQ on
Jebel
Road.
The report
indicated that
an SPLA
soldier who
appeared to
have been shot
was taken away
from the scene
by other Host
Government
security
personnel. The
body of a
deceased SPLA
–IO was
reportedly
later
discovered in
the same
general area.
It could
however not be
ascertained if
this was the
same person
earlier taken
away by HG
security
personnel
neither could
it be
confirmed if
the cause of
death
was as a
result of
gunshots.

On June 21, UN
DSS issued and
Inner City
Press has
obtained and
exclusively
publishes the
below advisory
about South
Sudan - well,
Juba - which
contrasts to
DSS officials'
behavior, for
example in New
York where on
February 19
they pushed
Inner City
Press into the
street
(apparently
ordered to do
so by DPI's
Cristina
Gallach), on
March 10 ordered
it out of the
UN
contrary to
published
rules, and
since then
have harassed
the Press even
when it has a
minder.